Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol.

1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7 1

Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights

Editorial
Inaugural Issue

Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to

Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu
(Dated: January 1, 2010)

ABSTRACT
Scientific GOD Institute ("SGI") and its flagship publication Scientific GOD Journal ("SGJ" this journal) is
not about a particular religion nor is it focused on religious debates. Rather, it is an institution (and
publication) where scientists, philosophers, theologians and other learned scholars publish their
research results and express their views on the issues outlined herein. In doing so, the editors of SGJ
hope that one day we will be able to answer scientifically the questions concerning us the most - who
are we, where did we come from, where are we going, and, is there a Scientific GOD? Therefore, this
Journal is dedicated to scientific inquiry on GOD. The herein authors believe that in this golden age of
Science the GOD in whom we trust should be spiritual as well as scientific. Indeed, since we are all
made out of the same subatomic, atomic and genetic alphabets, the scientific GOD each of us seeks
should be one and the same whatever our race, religion and other differences.

Key Words: scientific GOD, science, religion, consciousness

1. Purpose & Mission1 religious debates. Rather, it is an institution (and

Scientific GOD Institute ("SGI") and its
flagship publication Scientific GOD Journal ("SGJ"
this journal) entered the implementation phase
since October, 2003 under the ownership and
sponsorship of QuantumDream, Inc. However,
the ownership will soon change to a non-profit
organization/corporation to be set up for the
purpose and mission stated herein. In retro-
spect, it has been a long but very rewarding
journey for the herein authors to this point.
As already stated in October, 2003 at
http://scigod.org, the purpose and mission of
SGI are to conduct scientific inquiries on the
nature and origins of life, mind, physical laws
and mathematics and their possible connections
to a scientifically approachable transcendental
ground of existence – the authors call "Scientific
GOD." By “scientific inquiries”, the authors mean
building concrete and testable models and/or
hypotheses connected to hard sciences (e.g.,
physics, neuroscience, biochemistry and
physiology) and doing the experimental testing.
Thus, SGI (and its publication SGJ) is not
about a particular religion nor is it focused on
publication) where scientists, philosophers,
theologians and other learned scholars publish
their research results and express their views on
the issues outlined herein. In doing so, the
editors of SGJ hope that one day we will be able
to answer scientifically the questions concerning
us the most - who are we, where did we come
from, where are we going, and, is there a
Scientific GOD? Therefore, this Journal is
dedicated to scientific inquiry on GOD. The
herein authors believe that in this golden age of
Science the GOD in whom we trust should be
spiritual as well as scientific. Indeed, since we
are all made out of the same subatomic, atomic
and genetic alphabets, the scientific GOD each of
us seeks should be one and the same whatever
our race, religion and other differences.
2. Miles Stones Leading to SGJ’s Formal Launch
First, it is instructive to look at the result
of a poll conducted by SGI at http://scigod.org
since October 2003 to the present as shown
below:

Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D.

Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY
11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org
ISSN: Scientific GOD Journal
Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7 2
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights

Is scientific inquiry on GOD feasible? water being manipulated, the authors also found
non-local chemical, thermal and gravitational
Yes effects (Hu & Wu, 2006c, 2007). It was
56.83% (104)
No 19.67% (36) discovered that the pH value, temperature and
I don't
10.93% (20)
gravity of a liquid such as water in the detecting
know
reservoirs can be non-locally affected through
I don't
care 4.37% (8) manipulating water in the remote reservoir (Id.).
I don't These non-local effects are all reproducible,
believe in 8.20% (15)
GOD surprisingly robust and further support a
quantum brain theory such as the spin mediated
Total Votes: 183
consciousness theory (Id.). They can be used for
non-local signaling and many other purposes.
There are total of 183 votes out of which 104
Perhaps the most shocking is that the
votes (57%) are “Yes”, 36 votes (20%) are “No”,
authors experimentally demonstrated Newton's
20 (11%) voted “don’t know”, 15 (8%) voted
instantaneous gravity and Mach's instantaneous
“don’t believe in GOD”, and 8 (4%) voted “don’t
connection conjecture and the relationship
care”. Therefore, not only the herein authors but
between gravity and quantum entanglement
also the majority of the voters participated in
(Id.). These findings also imply that the
the poll so far agree that a scientific inquiry on
properties of all matters can be affected non-
GOD is feasible. This is very encouraging, indeed.
locally through quantum entanglement
Second, the herein authors have been
mediated processes. Second, the second law of
doing hard and scientific work over the last ten
thermodynamics may not hold when two
years since 2000 (See, e.g., Hu & Wu, 2001-2007)
quantum-entangled systems together with their
thus making the formal launch of SGJ feasible
respective local environments are considered as
and practical.
two isolated systems and one of them is
In a series of publications, the herein
manipulated. Third, gravity has a non-local
authors proposed a novel mechanism of
aspect associated with quantum entanglement
anesthetic action, a spin-mediated conscious-
thus can be non-locally manipulated through
ness theory, and a theory in which spin is a
quantum entanglement mediated processes.
primordial self-reference process driving
Fourth, in quantum- entangled systems such as
quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and
biological systems, quantum information may
consciousness (See, e.g., Hu & Wu, 2001-2004).
drive such systems to a more ordered state
Then, the authors found ways to test
against the disorderly effect of environmental
experimentally the spin-mediated consciousness
heat.
theory (Hu & Wu, 2006-2007). It was discovered
On a more fundamental level, these
that applying magnetic pulses to the brain when
experimental findings shed new lights on the
an anesthetic was placed in between caused the
nature and characteristics of quantum entangle-
brain to feel the effect of said anesthetic as if the
ment and gravity, reveal the apparent conflict
test subject had actually inhaled the same (Hu &
between quantum theory and Einstein’s theories
Wu, 2006a&b). It was also discovered that
of relativity, provide vital clues for resolution of
drinking water exposed to magnetic pulses, laser
the measurement problem, and support non-
light or microwave when an anesthetic was
local hidden variable based theories and a non-
placed in between also causes brain effects in
local cosmology. In short, the above experiments
various degrees (Id.). Through additional
call for drastic changes in the authors own
experiments, the authors verified that the said
under-standings of nature, consciousness and
brain effect was indeed the consequence of
life.
quantum entanglement (Id.). These results defy
In February 2008, the herein first author
common belief that quantum entanglement
wrote an essay entitled “We Have a Dream”
alone cannot be used to transmit information
calling for and predicting drastic changes in the
and support the possibility of a quantum brain.
sacred enterprises of Science and Religion (Hu,
Experimenting with simple physical
2008a). In December 2008, the first author
systems such as water quantum-entangled with
ISSN: Scientific GOD Journal
Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
wrote an editorial which appeared in Neuro-
Quantology reflecting on the state of science,
religion and consciousness (Hu, 2008b).
The said editorial stated that the herein
authors shall try to realize in concrete and
scientific terms the spiritual and philosophical
insights of the intellectual and spiritual giants by
attempting the feat of laying down an
ontological foundation for a genuine theory of
everything which shall include consciousness,
gravity and even spirituality (Id.). The editorial
also warned that in the case the herein authors
shall succeed, let no one in science become the
subject of Planck’s agony and irony that “[a] new
scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
its opponents and making them see the light, but
rather because its opponents eventually die, and
a new generation grows up that is familiar with
it” (Planck, 1949).
On December 21, 2009, the herein
authors made public the work entitled “The
Principle of Existence: Toward a Scientific Theory
of Everything” which was mentioned in the
editorial (Hu, 2008b) by releasing a preprint for
comments by friends, colleagues and the public.
So far, the authors have received mainly
four types of reactions to the preprint through e-
mails and in forums: (1) appraises from quite a
few spiritually enlightened ones of the Rumi
type but they admit that they could not judge
the mathematics; (2) two hostile ones who have
been apparently driven mad by the preprint; (3)
positive comments in general terms from two
experts in physics; and (4) no comments from a
few experts in physics who said either no time to
comment or would comment later.
The work has also been submitted for
publication on December 21, 2009 to a journal
which provisionally accepted it for publication
pending review of the mathematics. But at this
stage, the feedback from the two reviewers as
relayed by the chief editor of that journal under
submission is that there is too much theology in
the work (which is not true as any reader of the
preprint of the work can tell) thus unsuitable for
publication as it stands now. The herein authors
have yet to see any written reports from the
reviewers on the mathematics in the work but
do not hold breaths on anything would
forthcoming.
ISSN:
Published by QuantumDream, Inc.
3
While contemplating modifications of
the work by leaving GOD and/or “hard” mathe-
matics and equations out in order to have the
work to see daylight in one or two scientific
journals emphasizing consciousness and physics
respectively, the herein authors strongly feel
that this yielding to the present circumstances of
scientific journalism hardly do justice to the
work or to the scientific GOD which the work
proposes. However, the herein authors fully
understand the fear, agony and circumstances of
the editors of the scientific journals being
approached. Due to the present human and
scientific conditions which we all strive to
improve, the fault is hardly the editors who have
many constituents to serve and answer to.
Therefore, time is ripe to formally launch
SGJ at this critical moment – the first month and
year of a brand-new decade in the New
Millennium and the fast approaching December
2012 during which the supposed transformation
of mankind shall occur, while the scientific GOD
being proposed are denied entry into the door of
modern sciences.
3. The State of Science
The modern scientific enterprise,
especially theoretical physics in the establish-
ment, seems to be near the brink of intellectual
and moral bankruptcy (See, e.g., Smolin, 2006 &
Woit, 2006).
Naturally, one would ask: How did the
establishment end up in this situation? One of
the popular explanations is that genius only
comes along once in a while. Max Planck (1936)
once said that “[n]ew scientific ideas never
spring from a communal body, however
organized, but rather from the head of an
individually inspired researcher who struggles
with his problems in lonely thought and unites
all his thought on one single point which is his
whole world for the moment.” However, even to
accept this explanation to be somewhat true,
most of us have to admit our own mediocrity
and have the courage to change by becoming
humble, open-minded and willing to hear
alternative theories and opposing views.
The sad fact is that this is very hard to do
because of our human nature. Instead, some of
us in the field, on the one hand, worship past
geniuses by elevating their theories and
Scientific GOD Journal
www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
discoveries to absolute truths (dogmas) and, on
the other hand, treat any alternative theories or
views as crackpot theories or worse. When more
and more individuals having influences and/or
controls over research funding, research
direction, hiring of scientists, graduate programs
and undergraduate programs do these things,
the stagnant field enters into a vicious cycle of
further stagnancy and mediocrity. Even worse,
when these individuals themselves are elevated
to the status of living geniuses and enthroned
onto prominent positions, chairs and titles, they
exercise even greater power to the greater
detriment of the already stagnant field and
science overall.
On the darker and sinister side, many
individuals in the modern science enterprises
treat science not as an arena of truth-seeking
but a place of livelihood, business and other
personal gains. The goal for them is not about
truth but themselves. These individuals create so
much of the unhealthy atmosphere in science
such as rivalry, protectionism, hypocrisy,
commercialism and suppression and intolerance
of alternative views which directly lead to
mediocrity and stagnancy in science.
The damages could be severe. First,
generations of young scientists might have been
brain washed. This would perhaps be the
greatest damage and most unfortunate. Second,
available governmental and private funds have
been misallocated and wasted. Third, certain
areas of science, especially theoretical physics,
have become not only distorted but also
inaccessible to common people in contrary to
one of the sacred goals of science which is to
enlighten the mass.
Similarly, being the mouthpieces of the
establishment sciences, the mainstream science
journals and electronic archives reject almost
everything which does not meet establishment’s
approval, although they speak of freedom and
impartiality of scientific journalism.
In addition, in mainstream sciences the
study and even the mentioning of mind or
consciousness are till taboo and indeed the
physicists’ version of a theory of everything does
not include consciousness. However, physicists
encountered consciousness more than eighty
years ever since quantum mechanics was born
(see, e.g., Rosenblum & Kuttner, 2006). Instead
ISSN:
Published by QuantumDream, Inc.
4
of embracing such encounters and exploring the
mystery of consciousness, the majority of
physicists have been avoiding the consciousness
issue like a plague.
The irony is that, if we cannot
understand ourselves and refuse to do so, how
can we hope to understand fundamentally the
world surrounding us. Shouldn’t the logic be that
in order to understand the external world
fundamentally we need also (or we must first) to
understand how consciousness work. How can
one call one’s theory a theory of everything if
everything is not included?
4. The State of Religion and Spirituality
"Science and religion are two windows that
people look through, trying to understand the
big universe outside, trying to understand why
we are here. The two windows give different
views, but they look out at the same universe.
Both views are one-sided, neither is complete.
Both leave out essential features of the real
world. And both are worthy of respect. Trouble
arises when either science or religion claims
universal jurisdiction, when either religious or
scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious
creationists and scientific materialists are
equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their
arrogance they bring both science and religion
into disrepute." These are the views of Freeman
Dyson (2000) on the current state of science and
religion. The herein author couldn’t agree more.
More than 800 years ago the great Sufi
poet Rumi in his poem Universality gave
mankind a glimpse, through the spiritual and
poetic window, of a higher consciousness from a
GOD eye view. What Rumi described resonates
with many earlier spiritual teachings and some
religious writings. Rumi’s descriptions were also
refined or reflected in the work of subsequent
scholars.
The fact is that, spiritually, GOD and the
nature of consciousness have been well studied
and well understood over the millenniums by
the spiritually enlightened and many scholars of
various religious traditions, although most of us
never recognize or admit it due to our own
ignorance or arrogance.
It seems to the herein authors that
traditional religions are at the present stagnant
or even in decline and they must evolve and
Scientific GOD Journal
www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
transform in this golden age of science just as
science must evolve and transform to reconcile
with religion and spirituality. That is, various
religions must incorporate scientific ideas and
facts into them.
5. The Way Out of the Crisis
So, how can we turn around the currently
depressing and even shameful situations? First,
all men and women of science and religion have
to rise above ourselves by putting our personal
interests and gains aside and the mission of
truth-seeking as the first priority. Second. All
truth-seeking men and women should be
granted the rights of freedom, equality and
opportunity to be heard in the pursuit of truth.
Third, all men and women of science and religion
should be humble, open-minded and tolerant of
alternative and opposing views. Fourth, all
students in science should be exposed to not
only mainstream scientific theories and views
but also alternative and minority theories and
views.
Over the last 450 years since Copernicus,
we have reached the golden age of science to
the great detriment of spirituality. It is now up to
us, the modern scientists, theologian and all
truth-seeking men and women, to study the
nature of consciousness scientifically, reveal
GOD scientifically and further advance and
transform both science and religion so as to
reconcile and unify them and usher mankind
into a new era of unprecedented enlightenment
and knowledge.
It is with this candid spirit and a heavy but
open heart that the herein authors shall offer in
this inaugural issue a possible outsider solution
towards a theory of everything which shall
include consciousness, gravity and even
spirituality.
6. The State of Consciousness Research
“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the
most clear headed science, to the study of
matter, I can tell you as a result of my research
about atoms this much: There is no matter as
such. All matter originates and exists only by
virtue of a force which brings the particle of an
atom to vibration and holds this most minute
solar system of the atom together. We must
assume behind this force the existence of a
ISSN:
Published by QuantumDream, Inc.
5
conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the
matrix of all matter.” These were the words of
Max Planck (1944). Planck (1931) had also
concluded that “I regard consciousness as
fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from
consciousness. We cannot get behind
consciousness. Everything that we talk about,
everything that we regard as existing, postulates
consciousness”
However, as we are told by the authors
of a recent book “Quantum Enigma – Physics
Encounters Consciousness” that most physicists
today still avoid consciousness like a plague
(Rosenblum & Kuttner, 2006). Indeed, this has
been the situation since 80 years ago when
quantum mechanics was born. The authors
explain that this sad situation is understandable
to some degree because physicists like to work
with hard sciences (Id.). In contrast, conscious-
ness does not enter quantum physics through
the deterministic and unitary Schrödinger
equation but apparently operates from outside
space-time through free will.
However, it is the first author’s view that
there are no legitimate excuses whatsoever for
physicists and other scientists not exploring the
mystery of consciousness and its connections to
quantum physics.
The authors are of the view that the
reality is an interactive quantum reality centered
on consciousness and the interaction between
consciousness and reality seems to be a
“chicken-egg” puzzle. The perplexing questions
are: (1) Is quantum reality (the “chicken”)
produced and influence by consciousness (the
“egg”); or (2) is consciousness produced and
influenced by quantum reality? It is well known
that this type of dilemma occurs when one
searches for a first cause which is circular.
Many quantum mind researchers have
tried to answer parts of these two questions. For
example, on the first question, Henry Stapp
(1993) has made heroic efforts in the face of
various criticisms. However, the question of how
consciousness influences the brain or through
what quantum entities inside the brain is the
brain being influenced is far from settled. The
only way to get the correct mapping is to put
various models to experimental tests which so
far are few and far in between.
Scientific GOD Journal
www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
On the other hand, since a conscious
observer is made of quantum entities, the
second and reverse question should also be
asked, answered and reconciled with the first
question. On this, Roger Penrose and Stuart
Hameroff (1996), for example, have made
tremendous efforts in producing and advocating
the Penrose-Hameroff model which proposes a
specific mechanism in the brain based on non-
computability, quantum gravity and tubulins in
microtubules. Penrose and Hameroff are
admirable for taking the “low road” with the risk
of being ridiculed. Penrose’s arguments for the
non-computability of conscious process are quite
impressive and strong. But only experiments can
tell whether his bold speculation of quantum
gravity being the objective cause of wave
function collapse makes any sense. Even if the
experiments would be successful, it is still a far
cry from proving tubulins in microtubules are
involved in consciousness as Hameroff suggests.
Philosophically, David Chalmers (1996) in
the 90’s shook up the field of consciousness
studies with his classification of the problems of
consciousness into “easy problems” and “hard
problems”. The essence of Chalmers’ work are
that: (1) reductive explanations of consciousness
in terms of physical processes are invalid; and (2)
conscious experiences are as primary as mass,
charge and spacetime and thus entail new
psychophysical principles which treat informa-
tion as having both a physical aspect and
phenomenal aspect (Id.).
It is the view of the herein first author
that Chalmers’ first point is only valid with
respect to classical physical processes but not
quantum processes which are fundamentally
psycho-physical. With respect to the second
point, the first author can agree that
consciousness is primary but he takes that
experiences are informational contents not
properties or entities.
Of course, there are also deep philosophical
questions associated with consciousness.
Einstein once stated that “I like to think that
moon is there even I am not looking at it” (see,
e.g., Rosenblum & Kuttner, 2006). Then, there is
the old question “If a tree falls in the forest with
no one around to hear it fall, is there any
sound?” (Id.). To answer these fundamental
questions, we need to reconcile the “chicken-
ISSN:
Published by QuantumDream, Inc.
6
egg” problems of consciousness and reality
raised earlier.
Borrowing from certain philosophy of
Hinduism, the herein authors are inclined to
believe that: (1) Consciousness is both
transcendent and immanent, that is, the
transcendental aspect of consciousness
produces and influences reality as the interactive
output of consciousness and, in turn, reality
produces and influences immanent aspect of
consciousness as the interactive input to
consciousness; and (2) Human consciousness is a
limited or individualized version of this dual-
aspect consciousness such that we have limited
free will and limited observation/experience
which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels
but quantum at microscopic levels.
As a limited transcendental conscious-
ness, we have through free will the choice of
what measurement to do in a quantum
experiment but not the ability to control the
result of measurement. That is, the result
appears to us as random. On the other hand, at
the macroscopic level, we also have the choice
through free will of what to do but the outcome,
depending on context, is sometimes certain and
at other times uncertain. Further, as a limited
immanent consciousness, we can only observe
the measurement result in a quantum
experiment which we conduct and experiences
the macroscopic environment surrounding us as
the classical world.
Applying this dual-aspect consciousness
ontology, we would respond to Einstein with the
answer that the moon would still be there even
if he was not looking at it because it is produced
or influenced by the (unlimited) transcendental
consciousness and observed or experienced by
the (unlimited) immanent consciousness.
Similarly, the answer to the old question would
be that there are still sound heard by the
(unlimited) immanent consciousness.
7. Closing Remark
In the year 2000 the beginning of the New
Millennium, the herein authors humbly
embarked on the mission of scientific study of
consciousness. This mission made the first
author to realize in 2003 that the GOD in whom
we trust should be spiritual as well as scientific
in this golden age of science. In other word, GOD
Scientific GOD Journal
www.SciGOD.com
Scientific GOD Journal | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-7
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights
has to be known or revealed scientifically, if GOD
does exist. This also means that science itself
must also evolve and eventually unify with
religion which itself must evolve. So, since then
the herein authors have also embarked on the
mission of searching for a scientific GOD. Indeed,
since we are all made out of the same
subatomic, atomic and genetic alphabets, the
scientific GOD each of us seeks should be one
and the same whatever our race, religion and
other differences.
The herein authors urge fellow truth
seekers to judge only by one’s deeds. Every
genuine truth seeker is welcomed to judge the
herein authors’ deeds.
In his controversial book “The End of
Science” published right before the turn of the
New Millennium, science writer John Horgan
(1996) argued that we might now “fac[e] the
limits of knowledge in the twilight of the
scientific age.” However, as Thomas Kuhn (1962)
pointed out, science makes major progress
References
Chalmers, D. The Conscious Mind (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996).
Freeman, D. Acceptance speech for the Templeton
Prize, Washington National Cathedral, May 9,
2000.
Hameroff, S. & Penrose, R. Conscious events as
orchestrated spacetime selections. J. Conscious
Stud., 1996; 3: 36-53.
Horgan, J. The End of Science (New York: Broadway
Bokks, 1996).
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Mechanism of anesthetic action:
oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med.
Hypotheses 2001a: 57: 619-627. Also see arXiv
2001b; physics/0101083.
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory.
arXiv 2002; quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med.
Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646.
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin as primordial self-referential
process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime
dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology
2004b; 2:41-49. Also see Cogprints: ID2827 2003.
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Photon induced non-local effect of
general anesthetics on the brain. Neuro-
Quantology 2006a 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in
Physics 2006b; v3: 20-26.
ISSN:
Published by QuantumDream, Inc.
7
through paradigm shift. The herein authors
believe that we are at the threshold of a rebirth
of Science and Religion.
In closing, let us remind ourselves the
proverb that “the [truth] is in the details”. To
eventually arrive at a science of consciousness,
we must build and experimentally test various
concrete models of consciousness which are
connected to hard sciences. And to eventually
transform, reconcile and unify science and
religion, all truth seekers must work together in
the pursuit of truth. All of us in science and
religion must rise above ourselves. The new era
of enlightened human existence critically
depends on each of us truth seekers to shape.
Science and Religion are sacred enterprises of
truth. So, let freedom and knowledge to ring and
let all truth seekers be the scientific & spiritual
vessels to carry Science & Religion to new
heights.
Hu, H. & Wu, M. Evidence of non-local physical,
chemical and biological effects supports
quantum brain. NeuroQuantology 2006c; 4: 291-
306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007; v2: 17-24.
Hu H. We have a dream. NeuroQuantology 2008a; 6:
75-79.
Hu, H. The state of science, religion and
consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2008b; 6: 323-
332.
Kuhn, T. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962).
Planck, M. Interview with The Observer, London, Jan.
25, 1931.
Planck, M. Address on the 25th anniversary of the
Kaiser-Wilhelm Gesellschaft, 10/11 January 1936.
Planck, M. Speech at Florence, Italy, 1944.
Planck, M. Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers,
trans. F. Gaynor (New York, 1949).
Rosenblum, B. & Kuttner, F. Quantum Enigma
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).
Smolin, L. The Trouble with Physics (New York:
Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006).
Stapp. H. P. Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics
(New York: Springer-Verlag, 1993).
Woit, P. Not Even Wrong (New York: Baisc Books,
2006).
Scientific GOD Journal
www.SciGOD.com